Re: [PATCH] perf lock: fix sorting by wait_min

[Hitoshi Mitake]

On 2011å03æ15æ 04:23, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 05:54:58PM +0100, Marcin Slusarz escreveu:
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:47:15PM +0100, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
> > > if lock was uncontended, wait_time_min == ULLONG_MAX, so we need to handle
> > > this case differently to show high wait times first
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Marcin Slusarz<marcin.slusarz@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   tools/perf/builtin-lock.c |   13 ++++++++++++-
> > >   1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c b/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c
> > > index 0305a40..812ad26 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c
> > > @@ -202,9 +202,20 @@ static struct thread_stat *thread_stat_findnew_first(u32 tid)
> > >   SINGLE_KEY(nr_acquired)
> > >   SINGLE_KEY(nr_contended)
> > >   SINGLE_KEY(wait_time_total)
> > > -SINGLE_KEY(wait_time_min)
> > >   SINGLE_KEY(wait_time_max)
> > >
> > > +static int lock_stat_key_wait_time_min(struct lock_stat *one,
> > > +					struct lock_stat *two)
> > > +{
> > > +	u64 s1 = one->wait_time_min;
> > > +	u64 s2 = two->wait_time_min;
> > > +	if (s1 == ULLONG_MAX)
> > > +		s1 = 0;
> > > +	if (s2 == ULLONG_MAX)
> > > +		s2 = 0;
> > > +	return s1>  s2;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >   struct lock_key {
> > >   	/*
> > >   	 * name: the value for specify by user
> > > --
> >
> > Anything wrong with this patch?
> > I can't find it in linux-next.
>
> Hitoshi-san, can I have your acked-by for this one?
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Arnaldo

Hi Arnaldo and Marcin,

Sure, ignoring the case of wait_time_min == ULLONG_MAX is my mistake.
Thanks a lot!

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/